Synopsis Haut de page ↑
The papers of the Festschrift either follow lines of research in
landform analysis and modelling that have attracted Frank Ahnert’s
interest (papers 1-6) or are directly related to his work (papers
7-11). There are two soil erosion studies, one concerning the
short-term evolution of gully microsteps and scour channels (Bryan &
Oostwood-Wijdenes), the other the long-term formation of badlands
using a well established erosional susceptibility model (De
Ploey). Yair addresses the effects of climatic change at the desert
fringe and shows that depending on internal system conditions a wetter
climate does not necessarily cause a more humid local environment. In
a methodological study Jungerius and Schoonderbeek investigate blowout
development in coastal dunes. Both in empirical and modelling
approaches badland slope profile evolution has almost exclusively been
studied without considering the formative importance of mass
movements. De Lugt & Campbell draw the attention to the role of mass
movement processes in slope development in one of the most thoroughly
investigated badland areas, the Dinosaur Provincial Park in
Alberta. Most research in fluvial geomorphology has been focussed on
alluvial channels. Little is known about the processes of channel
incision into bedrock. In their study Seidl & Dietrich put the
emphasis on vertical erosion by streamflow and abrasion, debris flow
scour and knickpoint recession in bedrock channels.
The first paper directly referring to Frank Ahnert’s work is Olav
Slaymaker’s attempt to reconcile Ahnert’s process-response models with
a sediment storage approach based on empirical findings from the
Canadian Cordillera. It becomes clear that Ahnert has never attempted
to model fluvial systems with a disequilibrium state caused by a
glacial or other non-fluvial heritage and has never emphasized
examples where large-scale alluvial storage is important. Choosing the
example of the classic geomorphological study area of the Henry
Mountains in Utah, Schmidt’s contribution tries to demonstrate that,
using the terminology of Frank Ahnert’s 1988-paper on landform change,
no eksystemic variations of climate or tectonism are needed to effect
changes in system conditions. Ensystemic attributes alone can control
changing equilibrium states. It is shown that Gilbert’s dynamic
equilibrium concept helps to explain complex evolutionary aspects in
historical geomorphology. Also in Ergenzinger & Schmidt’s paper the
ensystemic character of landform change is emphasized. A soil erosion
model, originally designed to determine soil erosion budgets in
response to short-term events, is used to simulate long-term slope
evolution. This idea was inspired by Frank Ahnert’s 1987-statement
that process-response models yield valid results of denudation
regardless of the time scale involved. Kirkby presents an
erosion-limited hillslope evolution model as a generalization for both
transport and supply limited conditions. A wide range of processes is
represented in the model with the possibility of distinction between
rainsplash, rainflow and rillwash. Cox refers to Frank Ahnert’s
magnitude-frequency morphoclimatic concept. He questions whether gamma
distributions, recently much applied to hydro-geomorphological
problems, may not be more suitable for describing the distributions of
empirical precipitation data.